Volkswagon unveils car that gets 282 miles to the gallon.

Dave Kelsen wrote:
> On 5/24/2007 7:57 AM jim beam spake these words of knowledge:
>
>> Dave Kelsen wrote:
>>> On 5/23/2007 8:48 PM jim beam spake these words of knowledge:
>>>
>>>> bill wrote:
>>>>> On May 22, 11:32 pm, jim beam > wrote:
>>>>>> Tegger wrote:
>>>>>>> Broderick Crawford > wrote in
>>>>>>> :
>>>>>>>> **** safety, Drive right and you won't need it. Safety is just a
>>>>>>>> protection scheme invented by the American car companies to keep
>>>>>>>> out
>>>>>>>> the competition.
>>>>>>> If that's the case, the plan isn't working very well.
>>>>>> that's the ironic stupidity of it! rather than re-invest and
>>>>>> compete,
>>>>>> detroit simply put lipstick on their pig and hoped to keep selling
>>>>>> it.
>>>>>> now, domestic product is /so/ bad and /so/ behind the technology
>>>>>> curve,
>>>>>> it's hard to see how they could ever catch up. it's not like anyone
>>>>>> couldn't see this coming, not least detroit, and they were filling
>>>>>> their
>>>>>> pants with their fears. but then they had the reprieve of the suv
>>>>>> phenomenon when they were suddenly making 50% /NET/ profits on those
>>>>>> pieces of the garbage, and the japanese were standing about
>>>>>> scratching
>>>>>> themselves wondering what the **** people were buying those dumb-ass
>>>>>> vehicles for. but ever the pragmatists, the japanese soon figured
>>>>>> that
>>>>>> if that's what the round-eyes wanted, that's what they would get, and
>>>>>> suddenly the only thing detroit had left was taken away. dumb
>>>>>> *******s.
>>>>>> they deserve to go down in flames if they can't get smart.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The domestics are
>>>>>>> losing market share left right and center. Isn't Toyota poised to
>>>>>>> displace
>>>>>>> GM in the #1 position in a few years?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Not helping that the cost of medical insurance in the us amounts
>>>>> to $1500/vehicle, and that the union labor cost is $25/hour for
>>>>> uneducated high school dropouts who can barely be trusted to swing a
>>>>> hammer.
>>>>> These costs cut into the profit margins on the manufacturing
>>>>> end, and must be made up somewhere, and you can't really do it with
>>>>> efficiency improvements because those are capital intensive. so they
>>>>> make up for it on skimpy design cycle and poor tolerance machining, n
>>>>> other words, our cushioned american asses make crap cars because our
>>>>> union cocksuckers would rather make crap cars than get paid what
>>>>> they're worth.
>>>>>
>>>> it's not a union thing dude. it's management that makes decisions
>>>> on componentry specs, re-investment in new design and my own
>>>> personal favorite, production technology aka automation. absent
>>>> /any/ attention in those departments, american cars will forever
>>>> remain utter crap.
>>>
>>> Jim, one (not the only one, of course) of the reasons that poor
>>> decisions are made in these areas is the cost. The average cost
>>> added by health care and retirement packages for for laborers in the
>>> 'Big 3' is $1350; for Toyota, that figure is right at $100. *PER
>>> VEHICLE*.
>>
>> i don't think i buy those numbers. land, construction, utilities,
>> materials, labor, etc., are all phenomenally expensive in japan. they
>> have no natural resources and have to import everything. with our
>> cheap abundant land, natural resources, and one would have thought,
>> superior technology [we put a man on the moon remember] i simply
>> cannot believe that it costs more to produce a vehicle here. unless
>> there's something /seriously/ wrong with management and they can't
>> control costs. blaming unions is just smoke designed to cover for
>> total lack of balls in sorting problems out - if they exist. need
>> more argument? look at europe. germany has unions /way/ more
>> restrictive than us or even japan. labor over there is ridiculously
>> expensive and they only have a 35 hour week!!! so how do they get
>> anything done? automation!!! every time i see financial news footage
>> on tv showing detroit auto workers assembling vehicles by hand, /i/
>> see stunted and stupid management that doesn't have the brains or the
>> balls to sort out their production technology.
>
> I'm trying to find where I got that figure (the $1350 average); it might
> have been US News, but maybe not. Anyway, the $100 figure for Toyota is
> for the American-built model, as I understand it. They were able to
> start with modern (at the time) facilities, automate a great deal, hire
> non-union labor. They were also able to negotiate reasonable retirement
> benefits.
>
> I will continue to look for the source of those numbers - I saw it
> within the last week - but I doubt I'll find it. Most stuff I read goes
> by and if I don't capture it, I never see it again. So I can't back it
> up - unless I do some additional research.
>
>> bleating about costs? i don't buy it.
>>
>>>
>>> The American manufacturers can't get to Toyota's level under the
>>> strictures they operate within, but things could improve. Meanwhile,
>>> think about the process and engineering improvements that could be
>>> made with, say half of that $1250 per vehicle available.
>>
>> how many man-hours per vehicle?
>>
>>>
>>> Yes, they made their own bed; there was a time when they could have
>>> made smarter decisions and avoided this hole. But at that time, most
>>> people in the decision making process believed that the status quo
>>> would prevail forever.
>>
>> so fix it now!!! bleating about pensions liability relief and tax
>> concessions don't fix the problem - lack of addressing their
>> fundamental management paralysis is the problem.
>
> Their fundamental problem is paying for the improvements needed in
> process and material. While it may be true that they are unable to
> discern those needs, I don't believe it.
>
>
>>> They aren't in a position to make better engineering decisions now.
>>> They are hoisted on their own petard.
>>
>> they could fix it today. make the decision and execute. voluntary
>> redundancy. hiring freeze. overtime freeze. small salary increase
>> for the remainder. then AUTOMATE. the financial markets will
>> underwrite /substantial/ one-time charges if it means these morons get
>> their act back together. and getting back to costs, the german unions
>> were faced with the reality of suicide or cooperation. they chose the
>> latter. and now management and unions work closely so remaining
>> workers are highly paid but also highly productive. there has to be a
>> way, but i don't see detroit even trying.
>
> They could address it today, and *begin* doing what is needed to fix it.
> In my opinion, the unions' stand is simple: if they go the way of the
> dinosaur, they'll by god take the automakers with them. That may not be
> the case, but I think it is. You seem to believe that they'll take less
> in lieu of nothing; I think they've decided that less isn't worth it.
> FWIW, I do not think that union labor is the only problem GM et al has.
> But it's a big problem, and I don't see how they'll resolve it.

looking at the quality of detroit product, or the lack thereof, looking
at the level of innovation and development in detroit product, or lack
thereof, looking at the pipeline bereft of new product, or lack thereof,
/those/ are the fundamental problems. /they/ are the elephant in the
room. blaming unions, who undoubtedly contribute, is nevertheless
fundamentally missing the point. convenient, headline grabbing,
distractingly divisive, yes, but fundamentally missing the point.

bottom line: detroit has been asleep at the switch for 30 years. they
suck. sort out quality, [management], sort out reinvestment
[management], sort out pipeline [management] and yes, sort out the
unions, [management]. bleating about unions when none of the rest is
being addressed is utterly retarded.

bill wrote:
>>> everything you are suggesting has been looked at and failed.
>> when? how hard did they try? and what choice do the unions have if the
>> auto manufacturers collapse?
>
> Every time there's a new automation technology out, and right up
> to the strike line. Do you seriously think they are having cars hand
> assembled because they like it? don't think much of the plant
> engineers do you?

i don't think you can collect and present a coherent argument.

>
>>> The unions block attempts at automation, the unions block hiring
>>> freezes and overtime freezes,
>> so what choice do they have if the industry collapses? 'cos their
>> precious jobs are sure gonna disappear quick if there's no industry left
>> to work in.
>
> they don't believe it'll happen.
>
>>> the government typically steps in and
>>> caves to labor in the disputes.
>> great, prop up the insanity. sort the problem, don't band-aid it.
>
> I never said it was the right thing to do, but I don't make
> federal policy.
>
>>> An example of the insanity of us unions was the dockworkers
>>> strike a few years back, they were striking due to BAR CODES!!
>>> because they thought it would make some jobs redundent.
>> wow, where do you get your information? i live by one of the affected
>> ports. the unions didn't strike, they were locked out. and it wasn't
>> bar codes, it was hiring of non-union labor to do inventory management
>> rather than train existing labor.
>
> incorrect. the employers wanted to keep their clerical staff
> nonunion, the union wanted to expand to include the clerical staff.
> It seems that it was a lockout, they had to get the technology
> implemented and the union refused to do so, so that was that.
> http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=5168

i don't think you even read your own citation!

>
>>> As another, trains to this day have a conductor, the conductor
>>> was the guy in the caboose who operated the brake. when is the last
>>> time you saw a caboose? however, when the automated brakes came into
>>> play, the union threw a hissy and made them keep the conductor.
>>> the unions in europe are nothing next to our own.
>> you've never been there evidently. i have, and i have family there.
>> unions there are /way/ more entrenched and expensive. yet they make
>> more for less. it ain't a union problem bud.
>
> Yep, been there, and you are the most abjectly full of ****
> individual ever in history. Our unions force companies to pay
> uneducated workers more than the starting salary for a ph.d, not the
> case in europe.

well, that shows how little you know. trained workers here get paid.
trained workers there get paid. untrained workers here don't get paid,
untrained workers there don't get paid. qualified tech professionals
there get paid /significantly/ less than their equivalents here.

http://www.newscientistjobs.com/search.action

> Also, in europe, the union cocksucker mentality is
> not so pervasive as here.

eh? ever heard of a country called france? how about germany? they
get /national/ strike paralysis. i repeat - /national/ strikes. the
whole freakin' country shuts down. and you say /our/ unions are a
problem? you don't know what the hell you're talking about.

> >>> everything you are suggesting has been looked at and failed.
> >> when? how hard did they try? and what choice do the unions have if the
> >> auto manufacturers collapse?
>
> > Every time there's a new automation technology out, and right up
> > to the strike line. Do you seriously think they are having cars hand
> > assembled because they like it? don't think much of the plant
> > engineers do you?
>
> i don't think you can collect and present a coherent argument.

That's because you don't bother to read, pay atention, or remove
your head from your ass. Your daddy is probably a union cocksucker
and it has colored your views such that you can't open your eyes. the
simple fact is that every new automation improvement is met by the
unions at the gate with a resounding NO!! US auto makers lead the
field in new concepts applied to vehicles, or at least did until they
were summarily strangled by union mandated bull****. for example,
unibody, crumple zones, onboard computers, the assembly line, gps
navigation ALL originated in us cars, and were later implemented by
other countries, the issue is that we can not close our obsolete
plants, modernize the ones we have, or outsource to modern plants
without facing a strike by uneducated union cocksuckers like you. In
europe their unions strike ONLY when they have good cause, not to
prevent ****ing barcodes from eliminating a few jobs by streamlining
the processes.

> > incorrect. the employers wanted to keep their clerical staff
> > nonunion, the union wanted to expand to include the clerical staff.
> > It seems that it was a lockout, they had to get the technology
> > implemented and the union refused to do so, so that was that.
> >http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=5168
> i don't think you even read your own citation!

And I know you didn't read it. That article is spun as far
toward the dockworkers as it is possible to spin anything and still
comes off making them look like childish ****s.

> >>> As another, trains to this day have a conductor, the conductor
> >>> was the guy in the caboose who operated the brake. when is the last
> >>> time you saw a caboose? however, when the automated brakes came into
> >>> play, the union threw a hissy and made them keep the conductor.
> >>> the unions in europe are nothing next to our own.
> >> you've never been there evidently. i have, and i have family there.
> >> unions there are /way/ more entrenched and expensive. yet they make
> >> more for less. it ain't a union problem bud.
> > Yep, been there, and you are the most abjectly full of ****
> > individual ever in history. Our unions force companies to pay
> > uneducated workers more than the starting salary for a ph.d, not the
> > case in europe.
>
> well, that shows how little you know. trained workers here get paid.
> trained workers there get paid. untrained workers here don't get paid,
> untrained workers there don't get paid. qualified tech professionals
> there get paid /significantly/ less than their equivalents here.
>
> http://www.newscientistjobs.com/search.action

nope, shows that you are an ignorant arrogant piece of ****. The
redirect to a job-site for scientists europe was quite a clever line
of total bull**** with no potential whatsoever to prove anything. In
the US, untrained uneducated unmotivated union cocksuckers get paid
salaries approaching those earned by doctors, ($74,000 for dockworkers
on average vs $100,000 for doctors starting salary for civil engineers
$33,000) salary for auto workers in the US, $25/hr, or 50,000/year,
starting salary for an engineer at ford, $25,000. or for example,
union garbagemen make an average of 50-75000/yr, vs an mba starting
salary at $42,000. this list doesn't end.
Also note that the german automotive industry is in collapse now
with similar problems to ours in terms of innovation, quality and
pricing. and as for french cars.... what french cars?
Modern quality cars come from japan or the NON-UNION toyota
factory in the us. Unions produce nothing these days but dead
industries and jobs moved overseas.

> > Also, in europe, the union cocksucker mentality is
> > not so pervasive as here.
> eh? ever heard of a country called france? how about germany? they
> get /national/ strike paralysis. i repeat - /national/ strikes. the
> whole freakin' country shuts down. and you say /our/ unions are a
> problem? you don't know what the hell you're talking about.

Other countries with nonviable auto industries fail horribly to
prove your point. I wasn't saying that europe didn't have unions or
that they weren't pervasive, I was saying that the union cocksucker
mentality like yours wasn't so pervasive, and for the bulk of europe,
it isn't. you are just too ****ing stupid for words. I tried to deal
with you rationally, but you just have your head too far up your ass.

bill wrote:
<snip retardation>
>you just have your head too far up your ass.
>
i must if i waste time responding to you! b-bye!

bill wrote:

on second thoughts, you /do/ deserve a response.

>>>>> everything you are suggesting has been looked at and failed.
>>>> when? how hard did they try? and what choice do the unions have if the
>>>> auto manufacturers collapse?
>>> Every time there's a new automation technology out, and right up
>>> to the strike line. Do you seriously think they are having cars hand
>>> assembled because they like it? don't think much of the plant
>>> engineers do you?
>> i don't think you can collect and present a coherent argument.
>
> That's because you don't bother to read, pay atention, or remove
> your head from your ass. Your daddy is probably a union cocksucker
> and it has colored your views such that you can't open your eyes.

wrong. and i've never been a union member of any sort. no unions in my
company either.

> the
> simple fact is that every new automation improvement is met by the
> unions at the gate with a resounding NO!!

so what did /management/ do to bring it in here? it's not like the
legal tools don't exist. it happened in europe despite massive union
protection laws and national strikes. and guess what, now europe is
highly automated and highly productive. germany at any rate. it has
unemployment problems, but so will we if we keep exporting jobs to china.

> US auto makers lead the
> field in new concepts applied to vehicles, or at least did until they
> were summarily strangled by union mandated bull****.

cite.

> for example,
> unibody, crumple zones, onboard computers, the assembly line, gps
> navigation ALL originated in us cars,

wrong. unibody was citroen, france. the germans were into crash
deformation zones in the 40's. if by "computers", you mean fuel
injection, injection was used in germany in the 30's. electronic fuel
injection was usa, but that was imposed on manufacturers, kicking and
screaming, by californias emissions laws. the assembly line, was ford,
us. gps is /utterly/ irrelevant when your crankshafts are cast, your
body pressings are mis-shapen and your transmissions barely last 100k.

> and were later implemented by
> other countries, the issue is that we can not close our obsolete
> plants, modernize the ones we have, or outsource to modern plants
> without facing a strike by uneducated union cocksuckers like you.

sure we can. if management don't have the balls to get on with it,
that's not a union problem. shut the industry down. fire the lot of
them. and start again. happens in other union industries.

> In
> europe their unions strike ONLY when they have good cause,

like 35 hours weeks??? that's a great cause!

> not to
> prevent ****ing barcodes from eliminating a few jobs by streamlining
> the processes.

read your own cites.

>
>>> incorrect. the employers wanted to keep their clerical staff
>>> nonunion, the union wanted to expand to include the clerical staff.
>>> It seems that it was a lockout, they had to get the technology
>>> implemented and the union refused to do so, so that was that.
>>> http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=5168
>> i don't think you even read your own citation!
>
> And I know you didn't read it. That article is spun as far
> toward the dockworkers as it is possible to spin anything and still
> comes off making them look like childish ****s.

so why did you cite it? cite something that supports your argument, not
contradicts it!!!

>
>>>>> As another, trains to this day have a conductor, the conductor
>>>>> was the guy in the caboose who operated the brake. when is the last
>>>>> time you saw a caboose? however, when the automated brakes came into
>>>>> play, the union threw a hissy and made them keep the conductor.
>>>>> the unions in europe are nothing next to our own.
>>>> you've never been there evidently. i have, and i have family there.
>>>> unions there are /way/ more entrenched and expensive. yet they make
>>>> more for less. it ain't a union problem bud.
>>> Yep, been there, and you are the most abjectly full of ****
>>> individual ever in history. Our unions force companies to pay
>>> uneducated workers more than the starting salary for a ph.d, not the
>>> case in europe.
>> well, that shows how little you know. trained workers here get paid.
>> trained workers there get paid. untrained workers here don't get paid,
>> untrained workers there don't get paid. qualified tech professionals
>> there get paid /significantly/ less than their equivalents here.
>>
>> http://www.newscientistjobs.com/search.action
>
> nope, shows that you are an ignorant arrogant piece of ****. The
> redirect to a job-site for scientists europe was quite a clever line
> of total bull**** with no potential whatsoever to prove anything.

eh? european engineering grads being paid $40k is bull****? home many
engineering grads here are going to work for that?

> In
> the US, untrained uneducated unmotivated union cocksuckers get paid
> salaries approaching those earned by doctors, ($74,000 for dockworkers
> on average vs $100,000 for doctors starting salary for civil engineers
> $33,000)

in europe, grads consistently get paid less than union workers.

> salary for auto workers in the US, $25/hr, or 50,000/year,
> starting salary for an engineer at ford, $25,000. or for example,
> union garbagemen make an average of 50-75000/yr, vs an mba starting
> salary at $42,000. this list doesn't end.

if you're trying to contradict what i said, you're making no sense.

> Also note that the german automotive industry is in collapse now
> with similar problems to ours in terms of innovation, quality and
> pricing.

really? is that why bmw, mercedes and vw are all over american roads?

> and as for french cars.... what french cars?

er, peugeot, citroen, nissan...

> Modern quality cars come from japan or the NON-UNION toyota
> factory in the us. Unions produce nothing these days but dead
> industries and jobs moved overseas.

and that's another point, why ship AMERICAN jobs overseas to china,
along with our technology, when we can AUTOMATE and keep our technology
at home. bleating about unions is totally missing the point.

>
>>> Also, in europe, the union cocksucker mentality is
>>> not so pervasive as here.
>> eh? ever heard of a country called france? how about germany? they
>> get /national/ strike paralysis. i repeat - /national/ strikes. the
>> whole freakin' country shuts down. and you say /our/ unions are a
>> problem? you don't know what the hell you're talking about.
>
> Other countries with nonviable auto industries fail horribly to
> prove your point.

as they should here. if they can't make it, they should pack up and go
home.

> I wasn't saying that europe didn't have unions or
> that they weren't pervasive, I was saying that the union cocksucker
> mentality like yours wasn't so pervasive, and for the bulk of europe,
> it isn't.

you've never been to europe!!!

> you are just too ****ing stupid for words. I tried to deal
> with you rationally, but you just have your head too far up your ass.
>

Eeyore wrote:
>
> john doe wrote:
>
>
>>"Eeyore" > wrote in message
>>
>>
>>>The crumpled metal may be what saved your life ! It's like they act as a
>>>cushion in an accident whereas in stiff vehicle it's like hitting a brick
>>
>>wall
>>
>>>because there's no 'give'.
>>
>>True, but if I'm driving a stiff vehicle with no give, but I crash into one
>>that has plenty then I'm still protected, like hitting a barricade that
>>crumples on impact.
>
>
> So you've got time to chosew hich car you're going to hit when you crash ?
>
> Hit another stiff car and you're as badly off as hitting the brick wall.
>
> Why are Americans never ever capable of thinking where their stupid ideas
> totally fall down ? And why do you engage in this insane rush to buy ever
> heavier cars to 'protect' yourselves whilst moaning about the ever-increasing
> cost of running them because you're making them more fuel thirsty.
>
> Do please THINK !
>
> Graham
>



I think that it is YOU who misunderstands here.

Consider the fact that Honda Civics which once were small now weight at
least a 1,000 lbs more than their original models.

More weight demands more HP to move 'em around.

All this (for the most part) in the name of safety when a good dose of
common sense would suffice. Add to this, consumers demands for more
room and performance.

There is no guv'ment regulation stronger than that which exists in the
US. Hell, I would prefer to have a EN1 engine in my '82 & '83 Civics
rather than the EJ1 but such was not permitted.

Oh, when you mention heavier and "stiff" cars, you're venturing into
vintage tin, not today's SUVs. I will be the first to concede the
rationale behind owning SUVs is practically no rationale at all...

JT

On May 25, 1:24 pm, jim beam > wrote:
> bill wrote:
>
> on second thoughts, you /do/ deserve a response.
>
> >>>>> everything you are suggesting has been looked at and failed.
> >>>> when? how hard did they try? and what choice do the unions have if the
> >>>> auto manufacturers collapse?
> >>> Every time there's a new automation technology out, and right up
> >>> to the strike line. Do you seriously think they are having cars hand
> >>> assembled because they like it? don't think much of the plant
> >>> engineers do you?
> >> i don't think you can collect and present a coherent argument.
>
> > That's because you don't bother to read, pay atention, or remove
> > your head from your ass. Your daddy is probably a union cocksucker
> > and it has colored your views such that you can't open your eyes.
>
> wrong. and i've never been a union member of any sort. no unions in my
> company either.
>
> > the
> > simple fact is that every new automation improvement is met by the
> > unions at the gate with a resounding NO!!
>
> so what did /management/ do to bring it in here? it's not like the
> legal tools don't exist. it happened in europe despite massive union
> protection laws and national strikes. and guess what, now europe is
> highly automated and highly productive. germany at any rate. it has
> unemployment problems, but so will we if we keep exporting jobs to china.
>
> > US auto makers lead the
> > field in new concepts applied to vehicles, or at least did until they
> > were summarily strangled by union mandated bull****.
>
> cite.
>
> > for example,
> > unibody, crumple zones, onboard computers, the assembly line, gps
> > navigation ALL originated in us cars,
>
> wrong. unibody was citroen, france.

in partnership with chrysler
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monocoque

> the germans were into crash deformation zones in the 40's.

I stand corrected.

> if by "computers", you mean fuel injection, injection was used in germany in the 30's. electronic fuel injection was usa,

Well, still happened

but that was imposed on manufacturers, kicking and screaming, by
californias emissions laws.

no, I meant the ECU. again, you'll just say it was installed to
deal with epa laws, but it still happened here. As did the catalytic
converter.

> the assembly line, was ford, us.



gps is /utterly/ irrelevant when your crankshafts are cast, your
> body pressings are mis-shapen and your transmissions barely last 100k.

here's an interesting bit. anyway, until pretty recently, the us auto
industry was at least fully competitive with anyone's best. What
changed? I'll tell you, the technology changed and the companies were
prevented from implementing it due to UCS interference (union cock
suckers)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...latives#Firsts

> > and were later implemented by
> > other countries, the issue is that we can not close our obsolete
> > plants, modernize the ones we have, or outsource to modern plants
> > without facing a strike by uneducated union cocksuckers like you.
> sure we can. if management don't have the balls to get on with it,
> that's not a union problem. shut the industry down. fire the lot of
> them. and start again. happens in other union industries.

If management doesn't have the balls to face down a strike, lose
billions of dollars and precious market share, and then have the
federal government step in and decide what to do based on what will
win votes you mean? look, this isn't complicated, the unions are
strangling the industry, they aren't the only problem, but they are
the biggest.

> >>> incorrect. the employers wanted to keep their clerical staff
> >>> nonunion, the union wanted to expand to include the clerical staff.
> >>> It seems that it was a lockout, they had to get the technology
> >>> implemented and the union refused to do so, so that was that.
> >>>http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=5168
> >> i don't think you even read your own citation!
> > And I know you didn't read it. That article is spun as far
> > toward the dockworkers as it is possible to spin anything and still
> > comes off making them look like childish ****s.
> so why did you cite it? cite something that supports your argument, not
> contradicts it!!!

It does support what I said. they had a dispute about freaking
bar codes. I was wrong about strike vs lockout, but it really amounts
to the same thing, the unions refused to use the new tech, and the
company said you have to. the clerical staff is and was nonunion, so
the union claims that they were trying to exclude the clerical staff
from the union were bull****. It's a little hard to find decent
objective analysis of political bull**** that happened 10 years ago,
so I'm going to have to ask you to look past the spin they put on that
one.

> >>>>> As another, trains to this day have a conductor, the conductor
> >>>>> was the guy in the caboose who operated the brake. when is the last
> >>>>> time you saw a caboose? however, when the automated brakes came into
> >>>>> play, the union threw a hissy and made them keep the conductor.
> >>>>> the unions in europe are nothing next to our own.
> >>>> you've never been there evidently. i have, and i have family there.
> >>>> unions there are /way/ more entrenched and expensive. yet they make
> >>>> more for less. it ain't a union problem bud.
> >>> Yep, been there, and you are the most abjectly full of ****
> >>> individual ever in history. Our unions force companies to pay
> >>> uneducated workers more than the starting salary for a ph.d, not the
> >>> case in europe.
> >> well, that shows how little you know. trained workers here get paid.
> >> trained workers there get paid. untrained workers here don't get paid,
> >> untrained workers there don't get paid. qualified tech professionals
> >> there get paid /significantly/ less than their equivalents here.
> >>http://www.newscientistjobs.com/search.action
> > nope, shows that you are an ignorant arrogant piece of ****. The
> > redirect to a job-site for scientists europe was quite a clever line
> > of total bull**** with no potential whatsoever to prove anything.
> eh? european engineering grads being paid $40k is bull****? home many
> engineering grads here are going to work for that?

All of them. starting salary for ALL branches of engineering is
40k plus or minus 5 depending on location and specialty.

> > In
> > the US, untrained uneducated unmotivated union cocksuckers get paid
> > salaries approaching those earned by doctors, ($74,000 for dockworkers
> > on average vs $100,000 for doctors starting salary for civil engineers
> > $33,000)
> in europe, grads consistently get paid less than union workers.

As they do here.

> > salary for auto workers in the US, $25/hr, or 50,000/year,
> > starting salary for an engineer at ford, $25,000. or for example,
> > union garbagemen make an average of 50-75000/yr, vs an mba starting
> > salary at $42,000. this list doesn't end.
>
> if you're trying to contradict what i said, you're making no sense.

Okay, thing 1 was that I was talking about union pay scales
compared to professional pay scales, and pointing out that they are
consistently higher.

> > Also note that the german automotive industry is in collapse now
> > with similar problems to ours in terms of innovation, quality and
> > pricing.
> really? is that why bmw, mercedes and vw are all over american roads?

Lag. unions work great as long as nothing changes. you'll note
that for the past 20 years, bmw and mercedes have been declining HARD
in quality, reliability and overall desireability. besides, luxury
cars are a bit of a special case.

> > and as for french cars.... what french cars?
> er, peugeot, citroen, nissan...

Nissan is japanese and the rest of them combined do not amount to
the sales on the toyota prius. France effectively has no auto
industry.

> > Modern quality cars come from japan or the NON-UNION toyota
> > factory in the us. Unions produce nothing these days but dead
> > industries and jobs moved overseas.
>
> and that's another point, why ship AMERICAN jobs overseas to china,
> along with our technology, when we can AUTOMATE and keep our technology
> at home. bleating about unions is totally missing the point.

the reason we don't do that is the unions will not allow it.
very simple, and very clearly true. Automation eliminates jobs.

> >>> Also, in europe, the union cocksucker mentality is
> >>> not so pervasive as here.
> >> eh? ever heard of a country called france? how about germany? they
> >> get /national/ strike paralysis. i repeat - /national/ strikes. the
> >> whole freakin' country shuts down. and you say /our/ unions are a
> >> problem? you don't know what the hell you're talking about.
> > Other countries with nonviable auto industries fail horribly to
> > prove your point.
> as they should here. if they can't make it, they should pack up and go
> home.

Okay, but we're trying to answer the "why can't they make it?"
question, and the answer is very simple. Unions. 100% of all union
auto manufacturers in the world are losing market share compared to
100% of the non-union manufacturers which are gaining. Those numbers
do not lie. No bleating, No squalking, just the cold facts, unions
and long term success are incompatible.

> > I wasn't saying that europe didn't have unions or
> > that they weren't pervasive, I was saying that the union cocksucker
> > mentality like yours wasn't so pervasive, and for the bulk of europe,
> > it isn't.
> you've never been to europe!!!

As it happens, and not that it's relevent, I've spent over a year
in europe, married a woman from there, worked with 3 companies, and
been in 7 countries.

bill wrote:
> On May 25, 1:24 pm, jim beam > wrote:
>> bill wrote:
>>
>> on second thoughts, you /do/ deserve a response.
>>
>>>>>>> everything you are suggesting has been looked at and failed.
>>>>>> when? how hard did they try? and what choice do the unions have if the
>>>>>> auto manufacturers collapse?
>>>>> Every time there's a new automation technology out, and right up
>>>>> to the strike line. Do you seriously think they are having cars hand
>>>>> assembled because they like it? don't think much of the plant
>>>>> engineers do you?
>>>> i don't think you can collect and present a coherent argument.
>>> That's because you don't bother to read, pay atention, or remove
>>> your head from your ass. Your daddy is probably a union cocksucker
>>> and it has colored your views such that you can't open your eyes.
>> wrong. and i've never been a union member of any sort. no unions in my
>> company either.
>>
>>> the
>>> simple fact is that every new automation improvement is met by the
>>> unions at the gate with a resounding NO!!
>> so what did /management/ do to bring it in here? it's not like the
>> legal tools don't exist. it happened in europe despite massive union
>> protection laws and national strikes. and guess what, now europe is
>> highly automated and highly productive. germany at any rate. it has
>> unemployment problems, but so will we if we keep exporting jobs to china.
>>
>>> US auto makers lead the
>>> field in new concepts applied to vehicles, or at least did until they
>>> were summarily strangled by union mandated bull****.
>> cite.
>>
>>> for example,
>>> unibody, crumple zones, onboard computers, the assembly line, gps
>>> navigation ALL originated in us cars,
>> wrong. unibody was citroen, france.
>
> in partnership with chrysler
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monocoque
>
>> the germans were into crash deformation zones in the 40's.
>
> I stand corrected.
>
>> if by "computers", you mean fuel injection, injection was used in germany in the 30's. electronic fuel injection was usa,
>
> Well, still happened
>
> but that was imposed on manufacturers, kicking and screaming, by
> californias emissions laws.
>
> no, I meant the ECU. again, you'll just say it was installed to
> deal with epa laws, but it still happened here. As did the catalytic
> converter.

but you were trying to argue it from the "automotive innovation"
position, as if it was leadership by the auto industry. it wasn't. it
was california's environmental laws that /forced/ a highly reluctant
industry into compliance. and they fought it tooth and nail - all the
way to federal court.

>
>> the assembly line, was ford, us.
>
>
>
> gps is /utterly/ irrelevant when your crankshafts are cast, your
>> body pressings are mis-shapen and your transmissions barely last 100k.
>
> here's an interesting bit. anyway, until pretty recently, the us auto
> industry was at least fully competitive with anyone's best. What
> changed? I'll tell you, the technology changed and the companies were
> prevented from implementing it due to UCS interference (union cock
> suckers)
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...latives#Firsts

i can tell you for sure, the bit on injection chronology is wrong. the
me109 german fighter plane from ww2 used fuel injection, and that system
was tested extensively on german racing cars in the 1930's as the nazi's
armed ready for war, but in "stealth mode" due to the treaty of
versailles. it may not have been used on production vehicles over
there, but to claim that it dates from the 50's is incorrect.

>
>>> and were later implemented by
>>> other countries, the issue is that we can not close our obsolete
>>> plants, modernize the ones we have, or outsource to modern plants
>>> without facing a strike by uneducated union cocksuckers like you.
>> sure we can. if management don't have the balls to get on with it,
>> that's not a union problem. shut the industry down. fire the lot of
>> them. and start again. happens in other union industries.
>
> If management doesn't have the balls to face down a strike, lose
> billions of dollars and precious market share, and then have the
> federal government step in and decide what to do based on what will
> win votes you mean? look, this isn't complicated, the unions are
> strangling the industry, they aren't the only problem, but they are
> the biggest.

unions are a problem, but other fundamental problems are much bigger.
they're /not/ responsible for poor product design, they're /not/
responsible for poor product specification, they /not/ responsible for
lack of innovation, they're /not/ responsible for failure to bring new
product to market, and they're most /definitely/ not responsible for suv's!

>
>>>>> incorrect. the employers wanted to keep their clerical staff
>>>>> nonunion, the union wanted to expand to include the clerical staff.
>>>>> It seems that it was a lockout, they had to get the technology
>>>>> implemented and the union refused to do so, so that was that.
>>>>> http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=5168
>>>> i don't think you even read your own citation!
>>> And I know you didn't read it. That article is spun as far
>>> toward the dockworkers as it is possible to spin anything and still
>>> comes off making them look like childish ****s.
>> so why did you cite it? cite something that supports your argument, not
>> contradicts it!!!
>
> It does support what I said. they had a dispute about freaking
> bar codes.

no, they were on board with bar codes from day one - they simply wanted
data inputters to have the choice of being union. what's so freakin'
tough about that?

> I was wrong about strike vs lockout, but it really amounts
> to the same thing, the unions refused to use the new tech, and the
> company said you have to. the clerical staff is and was nonunion, so
> the union claims that they were trying to exclude the clerical staff
> from the union were bull****. It's a little hard to find decent
> objective analysis of political bull**** that happened 10 years ago,
> so I'm going to have to ask you to look past the spin they put on that
> one.

translation: it's hard to find anything that supports the "unions caused
it" position! basically because it doesn't exist.

>
>>>>>>> As another, trains to this day have a conductor, the conductor
>>>>>>> was the guy in the caboose who operated the brake. when is the last
>>>>>>> time you saw a caboose? however, when the automated brakes came into
>>>>>>> play, the union threw a hissy and made them keep the conductor.
>>>>>>> the unions in europe are nothing next to our own.
>>>>>> you've never been there evidently. i have, and i have family there.
>>>>>> unions there are /way/ more entrenched and expensive. yet they make
>>>>>> more for less. it ain't a union problem bud.
>>>>> Yep, been there, and you are the most abjectly full of ****
>>>>> individual ever in history. Our unions force companies to pay
>>>>> uneducated workers more than the starting salary for a ph.d, not the
>>>>> case in europe.
>>>> well, that shows how little you know. trained workers here get paid.
>>>> trained workers there get paid. untrained workers here don't get paid,
>>>> untrained workers there don't get paid. qualified tech professionals
>>>> there get paid /significantly/ less than their equivalents here.
>>>> http://www.newscientistjobs.com/search.action
>>> nope, shows that you are an ignorant arrogant piece of ****. The
>>> redirect to a job-site for scientists europe was quite a clever line
>>> of total bull**** with no potential whatsoever to prove anything.
>> eh? european engineering grads being paid $40k is bull****? home many
>> engineering grads here are going to work for that?
>
> All of them. starting salary for ALL branches of engineering is
> 40k plus or minus 5 depending on location and specialty.

cite.

>
>>> In
>>> the US, untrained uneducated unmotivated union cocksuckers get paid
>>> salaries approaching those earned by doctors, ($74,000 for dockworkers
>>> on average vs $100,000 for doctors starting salary for civil engineers
>>> $33,000)
>> in europe, grads consistently get paid less than union workers.
>
> As they do here.

but you were arguing that it was a union problem /here/! it's not.
it's a union "problem" everywhere. the point is, detroit is citing it
as the "cause". it's not. it's management paralysis and lack of gonads
in dealing with their own lack of input.

>
>>> salary for auto workers in the US, $25/hr, or 50,000/year,
>>> starting salary for an engineer at ford, $25,000. or for example,
>>> union garbagemen make an average of 50-75000/yr, vs an mba starting
>>> salary at $42,000. this list doesn't end.
>> if you're trying to contradict what i said, you're making no sense.
>
> Okay, thing 1 was that I was talking about union pay scales
> compared to professional pay scales, and pointing out that they are
> consistently higher.

but it's the same or worse in europe. detroit citing "union" as the
cause of their problem is simply failure to acknowledge the elephant in
the room.

>
>>> Also note that the german automotive industry is in collapse now
>>> with similar problems to ours in terms of innovation, quality and
>>> pricing.
>> really? is that why bmw, mercedes and vw are all over american roads?
>
> Lag. unions work great as long as nothing changes. you'll note
> that for the past 20 years, bmw and mercedes have been declining HARD
> in quality, reliability and overall desireability. besides, luxury
> cars are a bit of a special case.

nothing much luxury about a vw. besides, mercedes are low end crap in
europe - it's only dumb americans being willing to pay a premium that
makes them "prestige" over here. ever ridden a taxi in germany?

>
>>> and as for french cars.... what french cars?
>> er, peugeot, citroen, nissan...
>
> Nissan is japanese

controlled by renault, france.

> and the rest of them combined do not amount to
> the sales on the toyota prius. France effectively has no auto
> industry.

yes they do. they /export/ nothing to the us, but nissan sell well.
see above. and they sell massively throughout europe, the middle east
and south america.

>
>>> Modern quality cars come from japan or the NON-UNION toyota
>>> factory in the us. Unions produce nothing these days but dead
>>> industries and jobs moved overseas.
>> and that's another point, why ship AMERICAN jobs overseas to china,
>> along with our technology, when we can AUTOMATE and keep our technology
>> at home. bleating about unions is totally missing the point.
>
> the reason we don't do that is the unions will not allow it.
> very simple, and very clearly true. Automation eliminates jobs.

no, exporting jobs to china eliminates jobs. automation retains jobs.
fewer jobs for sure, but they are retained, along with the technology.
ask motorola about the "returns" they get from exporting their jobs and
technology to china - a market flooded with cheap knock-off chinese
competition where they're having serious problems. motorola's
technology and intellectual property walked out the door every evening
when their chinese employees went home. and now it's being used against
their dumb asses. if they'd stayed home and automated, they could
compete on price and keep their technology safe.

>
>>>>> Also, in europe, the union cocksucker mentality is
>>>>> not so pervasive as here.
>>>> eh? ever heard of a country called france? how about germany? they
>>>> get /national/ strike paralysis. i repeat - /national/ strikes. the
>>>> whole freakin' country shuts down. and you say /our/ unions are a
>>>> problem? you don't know what the hell you're talking about.
>>> Other countries with nonviable auto industries fail horribly to
>>> prove your point.
>> as they should here. if they can't make it, they should pack up and go
>> home.
>
> Okay, but we're trying to answer the "why can't they make it?"
> question, and the answer is very simple. Unions. 100% of all union
> auto manufacturers in the world are losing market share compared to
> 100% of the non-union manufacturers which are gaining. Those numbers
> do not lie. No bleating, No squalking, just the cold facts, unions
> and long term success are incompatible.

elephant in the room - their product sucks! if they can't make anything
worth buying, they're going to go out of business. cost structures are
immaterial in comparison.

>
>>> I wasn't saying that europe didn't have unions or
>>> that they weren't pervasive, I was saying that the union cocksucker
>>> mentality like yours wasn't so pervasive, and for the bulk of europe,
>>> it isn't.
>> you've never been to europe!!!
>
> As it happens, and not that it's relevent, I've spent over a year
> in europe, married a woman from there, worked with 3 companies, and
> been in 7 countries.
>

so how did you miss the fact that unions have europe strangled with a 35
hour week, toxic high wages and benefits, and labor laws that prevent
terminations? none of those things exist here. companies here say they
can't make a profit because of unions, but the europeans manage to be
able to in spite of them? something's terribly wrong with that excuse,
particularly when you understand that it's the /european/ divisions of
gm and frod that are generating the profits that keep those two
companies afloat. kinda.

reality is, detroit management that has lost touch with their customer
base over here. and has continued to ignore the 30 year rising tide of
japanese manufacturers using AMERICAN management skills and AMERICAN
quality control to thrash us at the games WE invented. unions may be a
huge pita, but bleating about them is like bleating about the fleas on a
dog when it has your balls in its mouth - they're simply not the #1 problem.

> > in partnership with chrysler
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monocoque
> >> the germans were into crash deformation zones in the 40's.
> > I stand corrected.
> >> if by "computers", you mean fuel injection, injection was used in germany in the 30's. electronic fuel injection was usa,
> > Well, still happened
> > but that was imposed on manufacturers, kicking and screaming, by
> > californias emissions laws.
> > no, I meant the ECU. again, you'll just say it was installed to
> > deal with epa laws, but it still happened here. As did the catalytic
> > converter.
> but you were trying to argue it from the "automotive innovation"
> position, as if it was leadership by the auto industry. it wasn't. it
> was california's environmental laws that /forced/ a highly reluctant
> industry into compliance. and they fought it tooth and nail - all the
> way to federal court.

innovation wether it happens to accomodate a mandate or due to a
drive for excellence or is delivered by pixies is still innovation.

> >> the assembly line, was ford, us.
> > gps is /utterly/ irrelevant when your crankshafts are cast, your
> >> body pressings are mis-shapen and your transmissions barely last 100k.
> >
> > here's an interesting bit. anyway, until pretty recently, the us auto
> > industry was at least fully competitive with anyone's best. What
> > changed? I'll tell you, the technology changed and the companies were
> > prevented from implementing it due to UCS interference (union cock
> > suckers)
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...latives#Firsts
>
> i can tell you for sure, the bit on injection chronology is wrong. the
> me109 german fighter plane from ww2 used fuel injection, and that system
> was tested extensively on german racing cars in the 1930's as the nazi's
> armed ready for war, but in "stealth mode" due to the treaty of
> versailles. it may not have been used on production vehicles over
> there, but to claim that it dates from the 50's is incorrect.

Still an interesting page all in all.

> > If management doesn't have the balls to face down a strike, lose
> > billions of dollars and precious market share, and then have the
> > federal government step in and decide what to do based on what will
> > win votes you mean? look, this isn't complicated, the unions are
> > strangling the industry, they aren't the only problem, but they are
> > the biggest.
>
> unions are a problem, but other fundamental problems are much bigger.
> they're /not/ responsible for poor product design, they're /not/
> responsible for poor product specification, they /not/ responsible for
> lack of innovation, they're /not/ responsible for failure to bring new
> product to market, and they're most /definitely/ not responsible for suv's!

you are wrong. if costs are higher for X, then they need to be
cut on Y to stay even. costs for labor are higher and the automation
is a PITA to implement for every step of the implementation, so if
that's a no-go, then the costs have to be made up in other places.
The first cut is materials quality. second is tolerancing because
that has a huge effect on costs. third cut is engineering. you don't
have to agree, and frankly, this conversation is tiring. suvs are the
fault of the american regulation and the consumer, not the
manufacturers, so they are a red herring, the manufacturers were a
little slow realizing that the suv day is past, but not badly so.

> > It does support what I said. they had a dispute about freaking
> > bar codes.
> no, they were on board with bar codes from day one - they simply wanted
> data inputters to have the choice of being union. what's so freakin'
> tough about that?

The fact that their existing data inputters were non-union?

> > I was wrong about strike vs lockout, but it really amounts
> > to the same thing, the unions refused to use the new tech, and the
> > company said you have to. the clerical staff is and was nonunion, so
> > the union claims that they were trying to exclude the clerical staff
> > from the union were bull****. It's a little hard to find decent
> > objective analysis of political bull**** that happened 10 years ago,
> > so I'm going to have to ask you to look past the spin they put on that
> > one.
> translation: it's hard to find anything that supports the "unions caused
> it" position! basically because it doesn't exist.

hard to find any other areticle whatsoever that isn't from
socialism weekly. doesn't change the facts, which even in socialism
weekly look BAD for the union position if you read the article I
posted and look even a tiny bit past the spin.

> > All of them. starting salary for ALL branches of engineering is
> > 40k plus or minus 5 depending on location and specialty.
> cite.

http://www.doe.mtu.edu/news/degree_worth.html

well, seems that chem-Es and EEs beat that and it's aparently
been a while since I looked. I will therefore acknowledge being off a
mite. However, the fact that a chemE is in the same freaking ballpark
with the starting salary of a high school drop-out garbageman is
nauseating.

> >>> In
> >>> the US, untrained uneducated unmotivated union cocksuckers get paid
> >>> salaries approaching those earned by doctors, ($74,000 for dockworkers
> >>> on average vs $100,000 for doctors starting salary for civil engineers
> >>> $33,000)
> >> in europe, grads consistently get paid less than union workers.
> > As they do here.
>
> but you were arguing that it was a union problem /here/! it's not.
> it's a union "problem" everywhere. the point is, detroit is citing it
> as the "cause". it's not. it's management paralysis and lack of gonads
> in dealing with their own lack of input.

The fact that the european auto manufacturers are getting stepped
on by the asian non-union shops doesn't give you a clue? the US
manufacturers are collapsing first since they have the problem worse
than europe, after all, the european unions DID allow the automation
to happen. so, the collapse of the US manufacturers is making a hole
big enough for the european inefficient unionized plants to tread
water while the asians advance by leaps and bounds.

> > Okay, thing 1 was that I was talking about union pay scales
> > compared to professional pay scales, and pointing out that they are
> > consistently higher.
> but it's the same or worse in europe. detroit citing "union" as the
> cause of their problem is simply failure to acknowledge the elephant in
> the room.

it's not the only thing, but it is the biggest thing. also, the
union-ess in the us extends to all phases of the supply cycle more
than in europe, europe has all the russian imports to draw from,
nonunion steel, etc. Detroit doesn't. Okay, I'll grant that
management has made some hideous calls, but the unions are the lions
share of the issue.

> >>> Also note that the german automotive industry is in collapse now
> >>> with similar problems to ours in terms of innovation, quality and
> >>> pricing.
> >> really? is that why bmw, mercedes and vw are all over american roads?
> > Lag. unions work great as long as nothing changes. you'll note
> > that for the past 20 years, bmw and mercedes have been declining HARD
> > in quality, reliability and overall desireability. besides, luxury
> > cars are a bit of a special case.
> nothing much luxury about a vw. besides, mercedes are low end crap in
> europe - it's only dumb americans being willing to pay a premium that
> makes them "prestige" over here. ever ridden a taxi in germany?

yep, I have ridden in the 25 year old mercedes taxis in half of
europe.

> >>> and as for french cars.... what french cars?
> >> er, peugeot, citroen, nissan...
> > Nissan is japanese
> controlled by renault, france.

And mercedes is controlled by Chrysler, US. And renault is
merged with GM, Saab merged a while back also with GM, bmw merged with
land rover, british, jaguar merged with ford, so really, there's not
much point in your statement. nissan got big as a japanese car, it's
been merged with renault, we'll see where that goes, but for now it's
still a japanese car, just like mercedes is a german car and gm is
american, regardless of the stock ownership.

> > and the rest of them combined do not amount to
> > the sales on the toyota prius. France effectively has no auto
> > industry.
> yes they do. they /export/ nothing to the us, but nissan sell well.
> see above. and they sell massively throughout europe, the middle east
> and south america.

nissan is a great japanese car company, however, like I said, all
the rest of the french cars combined are less total volume than the
toyota prius.

> > the reason we don't do that is the unions will not allow it.
> > very simple, and very clearly true. Automation eliminates jobs.
>
> no, exporting jobs to china eliminates jobs. automation retains jobs.
> fewer jobs for sure, but they are retained, along with the technology.
> ask motorola about the "returns" they get from exporting their jobs and
> technology to china - a market flooded with cheap knock-off chinese
> competition where they're having serious problems. motorola's
> technology and intellectual property walked out the door every evening
> when their chinese employees went home. and now it's being used against
> their dumb asses. if they'd stayed home and automated, they could
> compete on price and keep their technology safe.

yes, however, the company does not need to ask anyon'e permission
to move the jobs, they DO need to ask permission, face the strike, and
go through the arbitration to automate.

> > Okay, but we're trying to answer the "why can't they make it?"
> > question, and the answer is very simple. Unions. 100% of all union
> > auto manufacturers in the world are losing market share compared to
> > 100% of the non-union manufacturers which are gaining. Those numbers
> > do not lie. No bleating, No squalking, just the cold facts, unions
> > and long term success are incompatible.
> elephant in the room - their product sucks! if they can't make anything
> worth buying, they're going to go out of business. cost structures are
> immaterial in comparison.

yep, gotta rob peter if paul is to get paid! non-union
manufacturers are eating union shops up wholesale, why is toyota fast
becoming the largest manufacturer and ford failing? what is the one
fundamental difference between the toyota factory in the midwest and
the ford factories in the midwest? UNIONS!!.

> > As it happens, and not that it's relevent, I've spent over a year
> > in europe, married a woman from there, worked with 3 companies, and
> > been in 7 countries.
> so how did you miss the fact that unions have europe strangled with a 35
> hour week, toxic high wages and benefits, and labor laws that prevent
> terminations? none of those things exist here. companies here say they
> can't make a profit because of unions, but the europeans manage to be
> able to in spite of them? something's terribly wrong with that excuse,
> particularly when you understand that it's the /european/ divisions of
> gm and frod that are generating the profits that keep those two
> companies afloat. kinda.

because they DON'T. they have a few areas strangled thusly, and
those countries are having economic problems. notice the patterns?
the ford plant in europe? NON-UNION!!

> reality is, detroit management that has lost touch with their customer
> base over here. and has continued to ignore the 30 year rising tide of
> japanese manufacturers using AMERICAN management skills and AMERICAN
> quality control to thrash us at the games WE invented. unions may be a
> huge pita, but bleating about them is like bleating about the fleas on a
> dog when it has your balls in its mouth - they're simply not the #1 problem.

We're going to have to agree to disagree here. it's fairly clear
that you're not stupid, however, we're seeing this from different
perspectives, I am both an engineer and a business-man, so I see the
true costs the unions place on their industries, I see the performance
of non-union vs union shops, and I see where those costs are being
made up. Your background is unclear, however, it's pretty clear that
you do have some technical background, and you are seeing the finished
product inadequacy. I lay the blame for that in 1 place, you in
another. screw it, in the end we're all dead anyway.

bill wrote:
<snip>
> innovation wether it happens to accomodate a mandate or due to a
> drive for excellence or is delivered by pixies is still innovation.

detroit can't exactly claim it a glorious achievement of leadership and
innovation. they fought and sued to stop it. and lost.

> <snip>

> you are wrong. if costs are higher for X, then they need to be
> cut on Y to stay even.

and if sales are zero, costs are irrelevant.

> costs for labor are higher

in europe...

> and the automation
> is a PITA to implement

you might be closer to the truth than you intend - management doesn't
have the balls to implement! personally, i have /zero/ sympathy if they
can't get it together.

> for every step of the implementation, so if
> that's a no-go, then the costs have to be made up in other places.

but automation slashes costs on everything. the only cost increase is
that of capital, but it's cheaper to pay interest on machine loans than
it is to pay salaries.

> The first cut is materials quality. second is tolerancing because
> that has a huge effect on costs. third cut is engineering.

but it loses you customers! don't sales matter?

> you don't
> have to agree, and frankly, this conversation is tiring. suvs are the
> fault of the american regulation and the consumer, not the
> manufacturers,

eh? so who makes them? japan didn't. japan stood about for years
wondering if we'd gone insane.

> so they are a red herring, the manufacturers were a
> little slow realizing that the suv day is past, but not badly so.

not a red herring if 50% of domestic production capacity and the
majority of domestic revenue generation is derived from them.

<snip>
> The fact that their existing data inputters were non-union?

no, having a lock-out in case inputters might want to join a union!

>
<snip>
>
>
> http://www.doe.mtu.edu/news/degree_worth.html
>
> well, seems that chem-Es and EEs beat that and it's aparently
> been a while since I looked. I will therefore acknowledge being off a
> mite. However, the fact that a chemE is in the same freaking ballpark
> with the starting salary of a high school drop-out garbageman is
> nauseating.

maybe they should join a union? [JOKE]

<snip>
>
> The fact that the european auto manufacturers are getting stepped
> on by the asian non-union shops doesn't give you a clue?

but they're not.

> the US
> manufacturers are collapsing first since they have the problem worse
> than europe, after all, the european unions DID allow the automation
> to happen. so, the collapse of the US manufacturers is making a hole
> big enough for the european inefficient unionized plants to tread
> water while the asians advance by leaps and bounds.

european manufacturers produce product european consumers want.
/that's/ why they're not collapsing. even american manufacturers in
europe produce product european consumers want, and profitably. why
can't american manufacturers in america produce product american
consumers want? profitably.

>
<snip>
>
> it's not the only thing, but it is the biggest thing. also, the
> union-ess in the us extends to all phases of the supply cycle more
> than in europe, europe has all the russian imports to draw from,
> nonunion steel, etc. Detroit doesn't. Okay, I'll grant that
> management has made some hideous calls, but the unions are the lions
> share of the issue.

dude, if the product is crap and not selling, there's no amount of
union-blaming can cover for that.

>
<snip>
>
> And mercedes is controlled by Chrysler, US.

other way around. daimler bought chrysler and senior management here
was german. but the germans just sold it back to wall street, so it's
back in domestic hands. now we'll see if the wall st sharpsters have
the gonads to do what needs to be done. or whether they'll just asset
strip and destroy.

> And renault is
> merged with GM,

cite. there were talks, but they ended a year ago with no deal.
apparently gm wanted to be paid to have renault bail them out!!!

> Saab merged a while back also with GM,

saab were bought by gm - they were desperate for a european marque of
quality.

> bmw merged with
> land rover, british,

bmw bought range rover. vw bought land rover.

> jaguar merged with ford,

ford bought jaguar. that's what prompted gm's purchase of saab.

> so really, there's not
> much point in your statement. nissan got big as a japanese car, it's
> been merged with renault, we'll see where that goes, but for now it's
> still a japanese car,

nissan was in the can and sliding fast. then renault bought 44% and
turned them around.

> just like mercedes is a german car and gm is
> american, regardless of the stock ownership.

so rolls-royce is english, even though it's now owned by bmw and has bmw
componentry?

>
<snip>
>
> nissan is a great japanese car company, however, like I said, all
> the rest of the french cars combined are less total volume than the
> toyota prius.

cite.

>
<snip>
>
> yes, however, the company does not need to ask anyon'e permission
> to move the jobs, they DO need to ask permission, face the strike, and
> go through the arbitration to automate.

so it's lack of balls. just what i've said all along.

>
<snip>
> yep, gotta rob peter if paul is to get paid! non-union
> manufacturers are eating union shops up wholesale, why is toyota fast
> becoming the largest manufacturer and ford failing? what is the one
> fundamental difference between the toyota factory in the midwest and
> the ford factories in the midwest? UNIONS!!.

how do unions affect sales and market share? frod is failing because
their product line is crap and not selling, even with massive price
slashing. there's no amount of union blaming can get in the way of
frod's poor lineup choice.

>
<snip>
> because they DON'T. they have a few areas strangled thusly, and
> those countries are having economic problems. notice the patterns?
> the ford plant in europe? NON-UNION!!

wrong. highly unionized.

>
<snip>
>
> We're going to have to agree to disagree here. it's fairly clear
> that you're not stupid, however, we're seeing this from different
> perspectives, I am both an engineer and a business-man, so I see the
> true costs the unions place on their industries, I see the performance
> of non-union vs union shops, and I see where those costs are being
> made up.

i work closely with union and non-union vendors. and some of the lower
rank union management are both stupid and corrupt. but in spite of
that, their membership is, by and large, highly dependable and work is
done to higher standards, even though it's more expensive. but it's not
so much more expensive as to be unusable. pretty much covers the
reliability/quality delta from where i stand.

> Your background is unclear, however, it's pretty clear that
> you do have some technical background, and you are seeing the finished
> product inadequacy. I lay the blame for that in 1 place, you in
> another. screw it, in the end we're all dead anyway.

it ain't over till it's over. this **** can be turned around if we
don't give up. and while we're down, stop shooting ourselves in the
foot by giving our jobs and technology to the chinese. automation will
cure that problem, but only after management acknowledge their own
problems and take some initiative rather than simply react and complain.